[ the main topic page ] [ the main page ]

Gozalov Ariz Avazoglu - PhD,
sociology and law of the National Academy of the sciences of Azerbaijan,
doctorate of the Institute of Philosophy RAN

Gamzayev Alihasan Alioglu - PhD,
director of Astara Pedagogical Technical secondary school,
Honored teacher of Azerbaijan

Countercultural expansion and cross-cultural interaction - philosophical view

Ariz Avazoglu Gozalov

The problem of the globalization is widely discussed at the beginning of the third thousand year. The richness of the publications and approaches-certification of the practical actuality of the arising matters, complicity and variety of this evidence. Globalization is the many faces and multidimensional processes, influence of them reflected on the development of the various states, and all worldwide society, connect all spheres of the activity of the mankind.
Globalization is characterized with the difficult interrelation of the own culture factor and civilization development, its contradicting, difficult influence on the progress of the society.
Today the phenomena of the culture, among them the signs of the public life, differs with the universal. Culture, processing by the people recognizably and unrecognizably is the validity, norms, traditions and so on-chain between the human and environment. Culture is represented through nature, political history and national image of the world.
Universal phenomena of the culture under the frame of the complete culture on the same levels, represents the far and excluding signs. Among them science and religion, philosophy and art, logic sense and mystics, mass communications and artificial intuition and so on. Signs, regarding with the various historical epochs, various ethnical or national tradition, laying on excellent nature, social-history, economic and other links, interrelation among them and involvement to each-other, act as the member of this or other cultural system. Various spheres of the culture joints with culture-historical and social culture context, close to the ideals and world conceiving statements, limiting priority of the metal structures, laying on the morphologic various cultural signs and processing culture dialog.
Concept of “national culture” and “cultural identity” became the key categories in the society mind and cultural policy. Today, in the terms of the increasing globalization all call yourself “ethnic paradox of the modernism” –increase of the national mind of the nations, search of the national and cultural identity, return to the moral resources. Speed development of the worldwide communication systems and intensification of the intercultural intephation conditioned the activation of the interest of the human on his/her place of inhabitation, culture self-forming, on the national “I”, historical memory, demonstrating “categorical imperative” of the modernism, multiplicity of the world and universalism.
National culture acts as the mean of the activation of the values of the spheres of the interrelations of the own agent (subject) with the other nations, installing the natural relations. On the economical, social, creative and interrelation with the other cultures of the national culture is subsequently “open” the significant (past. present and future), own values, resulting to the development of the multinational society and worldwide cultural space systems of the values relations and moral motives on the relation of the own culture, history of the nation, to the smalls-scale motherland, “they”, to the present and future.
Idea of the globalization, painting the image of the remote one-line process in the history of the mankind and hiding the danger of the unification of the multiple cultures leads to the depth of the history. Right on the equal huge existence in the world of the parallel independent cultures is grounded in the book of the Russian culturologits N.Y.Danilyevski “Russia and Europe”, there is he states the warning on the confirmation of the imperatives in the world and valuables of the one cultural-historical type as the cultural paradigm.
Cultural history on N.Y.Danilyevski, show the change of the cultural-historical types which differ on the religion, political, social and economic signs. Each culture has its own life, history and system of the valuables. Its territory, basing on the multiple side development of the society and culture differs the common human as the abstract –common, unified, not recurrent, unique-self existed. Danilyevski considers that that at the same time the various cultures and cultural-historical types, special cultures exist, open their opportunities and concrete historical periods.
According to the opinion of the philosopher “mankind”-is the deviated concept. It’s alienated from all real significance. Multiple cultures or cultural-historical types exist during the same time. It should be noted that the concept “culture-historical type” covers on Danilyevski the culture and civilization, it regards with the culture and civilization for many times.
On the modern society thoughts exist the various approaches to the conceiving of the core of the processes, arising in world culture. Some researchers explains the globalization as the objective, natural process of the spreading of the achievements of the high cultures (under of them the American and western culture are understood) on the rest part of the world, for the first time on the low culture on the purpose of the increasing to the leading states of West.
Others revise the globalization as the subordinating of all national cultures to sole common human, cosmopolitic (American) culture standard, as the policy of USA and western countries, addressing to the creation of the total governing, as well as through the own means (mode, information, show-business, mass culture and so on), on the washing of the national culture of the existence, the cultural variety for the ensuring of the direct realization of the own culture on the world markets. Especially second half of twenties centre become the period of the unprecedented culture of expansion USA. After the second world war it regards with Western Europe, 60s years of Japan and in 70s countries of Latin America, in 90s Russia. For a long time Russian culture maintains in the political and cultural isolation from Western. Thanks to “closed borders”, wide scale involvement of the valuables “phautov” (Western) and American culture in the soviet society is not arisen. Nevertheless in 80-90s the country passed the civilization transformation, became more open and available for the effects. Opening of the state borders is conditioned with the opening of the culture and make the beginning of the process of the veterinization of the culture as one of the forms of their modernization and unification. Globalization accelerates the process of the accultation in the modern society (interrelation and intereffect of the cultures, in the process happening their alteration) Conceiving of the new elements, education in the result of the resettlement of the various cultural traditions principally of the synthesis and uncontrolled acceptance of the other cultures (especially Americans and Western) valuables, conceiving as the ideal specimens for the following. These processes have the positive and negative sizing. On the other hand they allow the national cultures interrogate with each-other more, know about each-other, make the terms for the dialog and exchange of the cultural exchange of the information, unified style of the life, unique study standards, technical terms of the civilization, language of the interrogate (English language, for example: became the mean of the international interrogation), allow the mutual understanding of the nations. On the other hand, very active adoption, spreading of the same cultural specimens and the standards on worldwide is dangerous for the loss of the cultural existence. On the modern terms of the interrelation of the cultures, on essence running on the scenario, submitted by the Sweden sociologist U.Khanners: we will the witnesses of the “cultural homogenization” on the basis of the adaptation of the European standards for the national terms. In this case as states S.N.Ikonnikova the national cultures posses the sense of “exotic symbol”, attracting the tourists the national properties erased or stored as the exotic.
More perspective and humanistic trend of the globalization according to the line of the researchers is the development of the dialog between state and cultures. A lot of people think about the globalization as the strong factor of intensification of the intercultural contacts, search of the new forms of the mutual understanding and equal interrogation on the basis of the mutual respect, tolerance, storing of the traditional values and joining to the modern achievements of the world culture, joining of the national cultures for the joint solution of the global problems of the modernism, bearing the danger for the world culture.
For the complete functioning and development of the culture of the nation, as it s known the internal stimulus is necessary as the external, conditioned with the necessity of the creative interrelation with the world of other cultures. Drama of each culture as A.Panarin states regards with the acute weakness of the status of “other” in the world – the one who acts as the resource of the alternative knowledge. The flourishing of many states in the history of the civilization, namely their ability to study, the interest on the adoption and creative conceiving of the achievement of the others, keeping at the same time the autonomous status. The ability on the adoption depends on the type of the mentality of the nation, the properties of the religious belief and so on.
Culture always need the interlocutor, addressee, partner, godfather. Conservation of the national valuables decrease its creative potential, changes as the material poverty and moral scarcity of the nation. We support the understanding of the existence of the culture which based on the idea of the dialog of the culture and widely presented in the world philosophy and cultural thought, beginning from M.Nuberm, determined the essence of the existence of the human as “dialogic life”, up to M.M.Bakhtin, N.S.Bibler, Y.Lotman and others. True and meaning of the existence of each culture arise in the process of the dialogic contact with the destiny of the other nation.
Be in the culture means the existence in the interrelation with the past and future, with the actual others. Dialog of the cultures-interest and rejection, conceiving and divestiture. The history of the development of the human civilization is the eloquent evident of the objectification of the dialog of the cultures, when the meeting of the various cultures of the worlds (relation between Europeans and Arabians, Europeans and Chinese, Slavs and Mongol Tatar and so on), despite the difference and peculiarities, even in the condition of the politic confrontation, result to its mutual cultural enrichment. Live interpenetration of the various mentality, other life experience, creative cooperation and mutual understanding is the productive mono dogmatism, self isolation and self-respect. Artificially promoted obstacles and borders ruin the culture, limited the existence of the nation in the frames of the own “life world”, deprive the opportunity of the creative joining to the world history, destiny of the mankind.
Dialogism acts as one of the key factor of the approaching of the peoples and nationalities means the possibility of the interrelation of the contrary forms of the life, religion and orientation of the valuables, confrontation with each-other, limiting the hypertrophy of the ethnocentrism in the appreciating of the cultural achievements and possibilities. arrogance, distrust and even hostility regarding with the other cultures, the habit to examine the image of the other nations only in white and black colours is the soil, which supply the militant national egoism (negative nationality), bordering with the idea of the national and culture exclusivity. “We” and “They” – it is the real mosaic of the cultural and ethnic map of the modern life. As notes M.C.Kagan the dialog is the “universal covering mean of the existence of the culture and human in the culture” and the modern historico-cultural situation as in the world and is in our society-this is coming of the epoch “multidimensional dialog”.
World cultural practice certifies that the complicity of the realization, up to the crisis and failures, “universal culture model for the other culture worlds assured today several theorists (local and foreign) that not always the valuable of the one country is the valuable of the other country for their progressive and qualitative development. The position on the culture is the column for the own power attracts more sidings, on the own cultural archetype and traditions in the process of the new opening and creative understanding of the strange cultural valuables, idea of the dialogic interrogation as the basis of the progress in the terms of the globalization of the world.
Objectivity of the moral potential of the idea of the dialog of the cultures in the terms of the multinational society, factor of their durable progress and the special mean it acquires namely in the terms of its insertion to the worldwide globalization process. Equal relation of the multiple ethical cultures with the other national structures-on the other hand, necessary condition for the move to the global world, presenting in the ideal the unity in the multiplicity in the interest of all national cultures and all mankind.

[ the main topic page ] [ the main page ]